Thursday, August 9, 2007

Bill Moyers talked to me (via my television) and the real reason Chauncey Bailey is on my sideboard.

Bill Moyers spoke live (LIVE!) to a Journalistic Association this evening, and I was riveted. He talked about what the new generation of reporter(s) means to the rest of us: a generation who has their cell-phone inexplicably (he says words like this so fascinatingly) tied to their computer and any other tech equipment like it was no big deal. They understand instant news, and probably expect it. The generation he was speaking of are his grand children and my sis in law's gen, had any of them done anything important with themselves, like journalism (okay, that last 'dig' was mine. Sheesh.)

So what I'm saying is Bill Moyers is NOT geezing into a lack of understanding of the 'newer' generation and sounds MUCH more unafraid of them than I would ever profess to be. You can see why I find him more/okay, almost as riveting as Billy Graham. Why would I compare? Something in my heart compares them, except that the Lord is most like taking Billy from us before Bill, but I was thrilled that I could sit and WANT to listen to Mr. Moyers talk about my chosen trade and it was really special for me. As in, I was proud of myself for sitting thru the whole thing and LISTENING, unlike some of you I bet who are still scanning and waiting for something good. I knows ya.

Well, further highlights include him making my heart proud, speaking of blogs and more independent media. For as cranked out as I or Reader get, my blog truly is of the independent nature. And Mr. Moyers explained why this is increasingly important, in a world of conglomerates with one company for EVERYthing, including your news sources - this should SCARE you people.

I've already had the discussions in the early 90's journalism classes about how scary it would be to have ONE television station, ONE newspaper source in this world - and how we are rocketing right to it! For the lazy (think Homer Simpson and 3/4's of you) that sounds great - makes everything easier, at least that's what some Big Brother advocates have been trying to make you believe for years.

....And Big Brother was first brought to you by the illustrious Orsen Welles (not some dumbass TV show or any other cr_p), and this guy was considered too smart to have been a reality. Oh but he was. Prolific guy too (look it up 20 somethin's, its good for ya) he scared the crap out of 1930's radio listeners in War of the Worlds (people died if that makes it more interesting for ya), wrote 1949 (mm, maybe I have year off, but the switching of the #'s has big significance) which DOES refer to the original Big Brother, made one of the most adored and fawned over (and I must admit, damn good even for a Bl&White) movie, the 'Rosebud' thing - Citizen Kane! (see you just have to remember a little to inform, anyway!).

So I digress. But you can research this concept of how nasty One newspaper, One TV station would be for truth. The worst thing would for there to be Not Divergent voices, Or voices that that were bought and so stayed silent. What if a paper wouldn't SAY anything about something, wouldn't inform you, the consumer and citizen, because they were owned by a corporation that would look bad if it's reporters took a look-see and said something.

That is why independence is incredibly valuable. To be independent and not bought, and top THAT off to be brave and nearly unshaken and go after a story because you know that is RIGHT, you know that is what you were put here to DO, and it is a responsibility that person CHOSE and we should all bow to these kind of reporters, editors - people who do it in the face of death. (This is the Lord of the Rings moment when the hobbits are told that they bow to no one. Hello, am I the only one that wants to bawl then? Do NOT answer.)

So this kind of talk about corporation blah blah that I just exPLAINED to you in above paragraph lead Bill to the inevitable discussion - that of how incredibly brave are journalists that died for their craft - and on came the list which, I may have to do some looking up to find pics for them and present them here, where I would be mighty honored to present their memory.

You see, Mr. Bailey is only the latest in journalists that has been gunned down in a hope to shut up and stop a story. I guess it is obvious that it's done in the 'name' of e vil, stupid and shortsighted as well, a smutball(s) would take away the life of someone for this reason, but it also shows how important the work that the editor, reporter, journalistic person does.

Can you imagine? Places like Turkey, South America, Pakistan (these are my direct knowledge at the moment, there are MANY more places) yes, with cowards in covered faces (there are no words. Don't they care that they're going to Hell?) but now its AMERICA, Your Land, My Land people, a citizen, I just can't help pointing out, where we all apparently thought, "You just can't do that, and not for that reason!?! Oakland, California does not have to be considered thug central (even tho that's what the rest of us think) and this was not a 'standard' gang killing. It wouldn't matter to me who's coward self would gun down an upstanding hard working man (and that's how I felt about Mr. Bailey as soon as I read the story) who's job is was to be editor of a newspaper for these ingrates.

I wonder what it's like for his family, I wonder what it's like for his colleagues and I'm glad it was priority enough that they are starting to really get a handle on the perpetrators (I do mean plural, in terms of who really wanted him dead). But he's dead and it does matter. Exactly as terrorists, they wanted fear for all involved. And that is why I hope they tear the perps apart. But that's just a little JungleTart rage, you know how it is.

But Mr. Bailey is on my blog because I care. I cared before Bill Moyers mentioned his name today, and I care about all of them. Daniel Pearl and many whose name does not seem as familiar, all that kept doing what they were doing and faced death right on. For information, for you to be informed. If that is not the supreme of canastas, I just don't know what is.

intellectual copyright 080807 - that means I can legally hunt you down and make you quit using my stuff as your own, Numnut. All of my material is copyrighted, and has the same warning.

Oh, numnut will continued to be spelled n-u-m-n-u-t on this blog. Not only because I hope daily to enrage the num_nut that complained about it, but because I wouldn't spell it any other way. It reminds me of num-nums, which is kind of cute, like something Chip & Dale would say to each other. I felt then, as I do know, that adding a b to the mixture was just too crass. I was never thinking of the scrotal area of a man, and I don't think you should have to either, every time you see it. I'm not lascivious on purpose, only when necessary. I'm glad we've had this talk, and if your child misspells numnuts on their next test, well, you'll know exactly what to do.

Burn it, Burn it and tell them they're going straight to HELL!!!!!
'cause any good Mom (hah!) knows that's the proper thing to do.
Have a JungleTart Day!!!!!:)

No comments: